Mission Trips & AmeriCorps

Last updated on: July 3, 2012 at 6:57 pm by Fred Clark

Mission Trips & AmeriCorps 2012-07-03T18:57:34-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Matt Yglesias discusses Sen. Chris Dodd's national service plan, and in doing so touches on something that often arises in church regarding the practice of mission trips.

Here's Matt:

There's nothing wrong, generically, with such programs but they really need to be looked at one-by-one on the merits primarily through the lens of whether or not they're cost-effective methods of achieving the public purpose in question. Does appropriating more money to the Peace Corps make sense as a development strategy, or would it be better to boost funding for the Millenium Challenge Corporation or the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.

The question he raises is often asked of church mission trips. A local church youth group raises money for a weeklong trip to, say, Haiti, where they will be helping to build a school. This works OK. The school gets built. But it may not be the most cost-effective approach. A significant chunk of the funds raised winds up going to the group's travel expenses, all so a bunch of kids with little or no construction experience can travel thousands of miles to help out. If the goal is to get the school built, it would seem to make more sense to raise the money and let the folks down in Haiti use it to hire local skilled laborers — people who are already there, who know what they're doing and who may desperately need the paycheck.

But the point of these mission trips is not only to get the school built. That's part of it, but it's not the only goal. The mission trip is also designed to give the American youth group a tangible, visceral stake in the fate of the Haitian community. This is vital for the people in Haiti too. The problem with the calculus above is that it presumes that the total level of contribution is a constant. That assumption is probably not true. It's unlikely that the youth group, the church, or any other given community here would raise the same amount of money without the personal stake of the trip itself.

The purpose of the mission trip is not exclusively to change the Haitian community where the school is to be built. Part of the purpose of the trip is also to change the young Americans who are going there, and to change the community that sends them. Part of the reason for such trips is to nurture a sense of empathy, of solidarity, and an ethos of service — to create and maintain the capacity to care whether or not children in Haiti have a decent place to go to school, and to create and maintain the desire to help.

This should also be a part of what Matt refers to as the "public purpose" of any kind of national service program. This additional purpose is what separates things like the Peace Corps or AmeriCorps from other more professional and specialized development efforts. The service corps may not be as efficient as a more professionalized "development strategy," but they exist to promote and achieve additional goals that the development strategy does not address. They exist, in part, to ensure that our national character remains capable of supporting those other, more targeted and efficient, development efforts.

Having said all of that, I'm not persuaded that a big federal program like Dodd's proposed "American Community Initiative" makes sense. What Matt calls Dodd's "conceptual confusions" could be clarified with a better understanding of subsidiarity* (or, for you Kuyperians out there, "sphere sovereignty"). Programs like the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps have symbolic importance. Among other things, they help to ensure that bully-pulpit praise for volunteerism isn't completely hollow.

But the heavy lifting here will not and cannot be done by the federal government. It will be done, rather, by those closer to the ground: by families, schools, churches (synagogues/mosques/temples/covens/Hitchens Book Clubs), civic organizations, business, labor and media (old and new).

If all of these other actors play their part, then service will be a vital part of our national character regardless of what the federal government does or does not do. If all of these other actors fail to play their part, then anything the federal government attempts will be as ineffective and dim as a thousand points of light.

I like the parts of Dodd's plan that focus on creating incentives for service, and even more so the parts that focus on removing disincentives. (Apart from his proposed massive expansion of AmeriCorps, however, he seems to offer little to address what may be the largest single disincentive — educational debt.)

I'm still not completely sure what to think about Dodd's idea of mandatory service as a requirement for high school graduation. I get the impulse — a self-absorbed little prick really shouldn't be handed a diploma and declared "educated" until someone has pointed out to him that he shouldn't be such a self-absorbed little prick. And the idea of mandatory service for high school students begins to look more attractive the more you listen to the whining of its most vocal opponents. Yet for all of that "mandatory service" still seems like an oxymoron. Berea College provides an inspiring model for service and education, but students can choose whether or not to attend there. High school students don't have a choice. I'd like to see high school students encouraged to serve. I'd like to see them empowered to serve without suffering any opportunity costs. And I'd like to see their service rewarded. But, unlike Dodd, I don't think I'd like to see their service required.

This is where I'd like to conclude with a paragraph tying together all the disparate half-thoughts above into some coherent whole, but for the life of me I can't figure out what such a paragraph would say.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

* For a primer on subsidiarity, see "Who is you?."

Uncategorized

subsidiarity

Previous Post

June 24, 2007

Milestones & miscellany

Next Post

June 27, 2007 New media

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What is the correct order for putting off the old self and putting on the new self as described in Colossians?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Put on the new self, put to death earthly nature, clothe yourself with compassion, rid yourself of anger Put to death earthly nature, rid yourself of anger/rage/malice, take off the old self, put on the new self, clothe yourself with compassion Rid yourself of anger, take off the old self, put to death earthly nature, put on the new self Clothe yourself with compassion, put on the new self, put to death earthly nature, rid yourself of anger